Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description adds valuable context beyond the annotations by disclosing the sign-in requirement and that the tool will respond with an error message explaining the issue. This complements the readOnly, idempotent, and openWorld hints, and does not contradict them.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, with the critical sign-in caveat front-loaded. Every word earns its place, and the description is efficient without missing key information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is complete for an agent: it explains what the tool does, the failure mode, and the recommended action. No output schema exists, but the description implies the error response is informative, which is sufficient for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are no parameters, so the description has nothing to add. Schema coverage is 100% by definition, and the description correctly focuses on behavior rather than parameter details, which are irrelevant here.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool returns arrivals, departures, and guests in house for a day, which is a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like 'arrivals' or 'departures', but the combined nature is evident, so it is clear enough.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly instructs to call the tool anyway despite the missing sign-in, and explains why: it will answer with what is wrong and how to fix it. This is direct when-to-use guidance, including an exceptional case, with no ambiguity.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.